MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1024263097 · doi:10.1096/fasebj.20.5.lb103-a

Characteristics of in vitro prostate cancer models grown in human serum

2006· article· en· W1024263097 on OpenAlexafffund
Heather Louise Hurdle, Vera C. Mazurak, M. Thomas Clandinin

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsLNCaPProstate cancerAngiogenesisIntegrinCell cultureVitronectinFlow cytometryCell growthBiologyCancer researchCancerAndrologyImmunologyMedicineInternal medicineReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective To compare growth, prostate serum antigen (PSA) production and integrin expression (α 2 β 1 , α v β 3 , vitronectin receptor VR) in established in vitro models of prostate cancer, when growth media is supplemented with human serum (HS) from healthy men instead of fetal calf serum (FCS), the current standard supplement. Methods The cell lines RWPE, 22Rv1, and LNCaP representing increasing degrees of invasiveness, were cultured in growth media containing 1% HS or 10% FCS. Growth, PSA levels and integrin expression were measured using trypan blue exclusion, ELISA assays, monoclonal antibodies and flow cytometry respectively. Results There were no differences in growth or PSA production by cell lines cultured in HS versus FCS. Expression of the α 2 β 1 integrin was observed to be significantly lower (p< 0.01) in 22Rv1s cultured in HS. 22Rv1 and LNCaP cell lines had lower α 2 β 1 expression compared to RWPE (p<0.05). Expression of the α v β 3 , VR was very minimal in all cell lines, although LNCaP expressed greater VR when cultured in HS compared to FCS (p = 0.03). Conclusions Cell lines representing human prostate cancer expressed differences in integrins reported to be involved in cell adhesion and angiogenesis when cultured using HS instead of FCS, despite the lack of change in growth and PSA production. This change in expression is significant in regard to standard culture methods and demonstrates that attempts to make culture methods more closely resemble human conditions must be considered. (Funding: CIHR grant; Elizabeth Donald Fellowship in Human Nutrition)

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.281 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research→French-language works237,207→